Posted on 07/08/2005 3:07:46 AM PDT by Liz
Bryant - you know, the guy with blood on his shirt who was lying to detectives - may very well have raped that girl. You weren't there. I wasn't there. We'll probably never know for sure. Maybe it was the "badger game" or maybe it was a brutal rape.
It tells me all I need to know about NIKE that they would go out and hire some pig who cheats on his pregnant wife, then uses her as a prop at a nationally televised press conference, then buys her off with jewelry. Is NIKE telling us that Kobe Bryant is the best guy they could find in the NBA? LOL, I guess that tells us what kind of human beings populate NBA rosters these days. Darwinism comes to mind, and that theory is older than both the "badger game" and celebrity shoe endorsements!
That's about 30 minutes longer than you need, and we're doing the full Episcopal rite!
That's because you're s SMART guy, Karl, not a dummie.
Are you saying Kobe Bryant paid off a girl who tried to ruin his life by falsely accusing him of a crime that could have sent him to prison for a number of years??? Doesn't Bryant's pay-off just encourage future accusations against him or other NBA stars? Doesn't it reward the woman for making false claims? Or could it be Bryant feared losing a civil case? Or could it be Bryant feared discovery in a civil case? Or could it be Bryant actually had a guilty conscience? I seem to remember Bryant apologizing to the woman, too - through his attorney, of course. Hmmmmm.
ONE drop of blood on his t-shirt, but mixed semen specimums in her panties and on her legs, none of which were Kobe's. Really clean gal. Not a fortune hunter.. just willing accomapanies him to his room and when she says "stop" he stoppped. Even she admitted that much.
So why'd he pay her?
(By the way, are you saying rape victims must not be believed if they have consensual sex around the time that they are raped?)
Likely on the advice of his lawyer? Paying her was probably cheaper than paying his lawyer to defend him in a civil suit which has much looser rules.
And much more discovery. And a different burden of proof. And one of those "looser rules" you mention would be that Bryant would have to take the stand. (Maybe Bryant's credibility was even worse than that of his accuser's.)
As far as it being cheaper, I have to disagree with that. If she really made all this up, Bryant and his lawyer caved in to an extortion demand. That will only encourage future claims by individuals trying to cash in.
No, I am not saying that at all. In her case, she LIED and told investigators that she had not been intimate with another man for several days... a HUGE lie which was quickly revealed via DNA tests.
If he subjects himself to future claims that his problem.
I really don't care. All I know for certain, is that this case lacked evidence from the get go, and her own lies destroyed her.
A woman who has been raped does not want sex immediately afterward.
This is a generalization and a categorical statement I will freely apply to every rape victim.
Trust me on this one. (You're a guy, so you kind of have to.)
Exactly how many "cases" have you "encountered?"
Perhaps some girls find there to be a huge difference between:
(a) Having a married guy bend her over a chair, penetrate her like a pin cushion, then order her to kiss it afterwards
AND
(b) Having a caring guy make love to her tenderly
For you to suggest your theory is the only one possible is really a narrow-minded way of looking at this. Human beings are individuals, and they behave individually.
You're right that I'm not a woman and I've never been raped. It's also true I am a man and I've never raped anybody. Or cheated on a pregnant wife. Or lied to police. Or paid off a woman who is apparently trying to send me to prison for a number of years.
And HE lied to police, too. Hey, maybe they were perfect for each other! ;-)
If she was making all this up, Bryant shouldn't have paid her off.
Well then you do understand it. Restaurants, shoes, and celebrities are all products. They are "brand names." Celebrity endorsements are nothing more than pairing "brand names." In the best of circumstances that pairing benefits both brand names through association. More typically, it enriches one brand while boosting sales of another. In reality -- and if we were going to be 100% truthful -- you have no idea what Paris Hilton is like. You have no idea what Kobe Bryant is like. You can surmise personality from an image. And that's what corporations, such as Carl Jr.s or Nike rent -- the image.
Now, picture yourself as a vice president at Carl Jr's. You're making maybe $300,000 or $350,000. Nice house. Nice car. Kids bound for college. The ad agency comes to you and says, "We can get Paris Hilton or the guys who rescued the little girl. Your call." Figure it's about $500,000 for the endorsement, a million to shoot the add and then $10 million to buy ad time. Every market in which the ad airs must, must, must show an increase in business at the local shops or you're fired. Who do you choose?
We finally agree. Were I Byrant, I would not paid her a dime, no matter the cost of a civil tiral. In fact, I'd have sured the DA and the woman.
The choice is to pay her a million dollars over several years on the condition she doesn't talk about the thing and hope to make it back by regaining endorsements. Or, pay her nothing and let the media circus roll.
A woman who has been raped does not want sex immediately afterward.
This is a generalization and a categorical statement I will freely apply to every rape victim.
Absolutely correct. My physician husband has treated several (countless) rape victims and NONE have desired to be intimacy right afterward, In fact, most 'can't' enage for quite time time.
I don't care if it's a problem for him. He's a dirtbag. But what about all other men in society? If he really was 100 percent innocent, he rewarded a woman for trying to put him in the slammer. THINK ABOUT THAT. If she was really making all this up, she attempted to TAKE AWAY HIS FREEDOM! Why on earth would he reward someone for trying to do that to him? And why on earth would he encourage future women to make accusations against him or OTHER MEN in society the same way? Maybe he'll just pay off anyone for anything - just like he paid off his wife with that jewelry.
I'm certain he wasn't considering the effect his payoff money might have on other men. Apparently, he paid her off so he could get on with his star studded life and Nike endorsements. The payoff must have been chump change by camparison.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.